uruguay had collapsed in brussels. we came home and began to negotiate nafta. president bush signed in december of 1992. it was put through congress the following year. within five months, we completed the uruguay rounds. people did not want to have the north american market not have the benefits for the global economy. my friend to my left thing is that doha is dead. i believe there is a way to bring back. >> i'm still to your left. [laughter] >> no change at all there. i believe doha could contribute to those of five strategies i just mentioned. a simple package that would harvest some gains. i would move forward if i had a chance to do so. i think the trans-pacific partnership could be grade. the stated goal is to bring together economies from across the pacific into a single trading community to serve as a platform for broader regional integration and a free-trade area of the asia-pacific. the trans-pacific partnership involves nine nations. we have trade agreements with four of the nine. brunei, new zealand, malaysia, be add-nam' would ons. the potential f

secretary-general ban ki- moon speaking earlier today in brussels is calling on syrian authorities to exercise maximum restraint and he says opposition forces should also fully cooperate in the current cease- fire which he says is essential for political dialogue to continue. turning to domestic issues, reaction this morning to reports about secret service agents' actions in colombia from california republican darrell issa. in remarks on cbs, he says that lawmakers will "look over the shoulder of the agency and as it investigates the 11 agents involved." the chairman of the house oversight committee is concerned about the allegations that secret service agents or with prostitutes in columbia, saying that such a activities would severely compromise presidential security. we will hear more from the congressman later today when he gavels in a hearing on management issues and excessive spending at the general services administration. that's live at 1:30 on c-span radio or watch on c-span 3. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> it's been nearly 10 years since the rele

on nato, i am leaving tomorrow for a joint ministerial in brussels, the last high-level meeting that will take place before the chicago summit in may. we are at a pivotal point for the alliance, as we build on the gains that have been made in afghanistan, and try to chart the course for the future in that area. we will also be working to ensure our nato has the right military capabilities that will be needed for the future in order for nato to assume the responsibilities that it must as we proceed. even as we deal with these global security challenges, we have a great challenge here at home, which is working with congress to implement our new defense strategy. let me give you a quick update on where i think things stand at this point. since the president's budget request was released on february 13, the budget and strategy that we have developed have been subject to intense scrutiny on capitol hill. german dempsey and i went to the hill to testify five times before the key committees. there had been more than 50 additional congressional hearings the service secretaries, the service c

>> well, we're going to be discussing that in brussels and chicago. and obviously, we'll want to work closely with our isaf partners to determine what that enduring presence will look like. but clearly, it's -- it -- you know, any future presence will focus on areas like counterterrorism and focus also on training assistance and advice, as we've provided and probably will continue to provide in the future. do you assume there'll be hundreds if not thousands of u.s. soldiers still on the ground in 2014? >> i don't -- i don't think we ought to comment on what we're assuming at this point, mainly because we really want to engage in serious consultation with our partners as to what that presence ought to look like. >> but there will be some u.s. presence, correct? >> that's -- i think that'll be the case. >> secretary panetta and chairman dempsey, i wanted to follow up with -- on the attacks over the weekend. these kind of attacks are -- amount to something like guerrilla warfare. couldn't that in itself be effective enough to undermine the confidence of

i'm going to brussels next week. one of the agenda items is operation unified protection. what we have to do is be candid with each other. it they need to do what they need to provide. they relied exclusively on us to provide. i see this as a positive. >> what you think are the greatest risks of the united states facts ? >> on vacation i've been portrayed as saying this is too hard. that is not the case. it has to do something, and we absolutely have the capability. i have to be clear about the military objective is that i was being asked to achieve. i have to be clear about how these were contributing to some outcomes that we would all understand and agree upon. but the dishes stopping the violence, that is one outcome. the other responsibility is to balance the rest to the mission. what would be the cost of doing this? the risk to the forest is a zero sum game. we are deployed all over the world. if i am asked to do something in syria and the secretary says i need this option, my response ability is to make sure i understand this and that by articulate the risks not to t

i'm going to brussels next week. one of the agenda items is operation unified protection. what we have to do is be candid with each other. i can assure you i will be banned need to provide. in terms of isr, the infusion of intelligence operations and investments they need to make to close some caps we're here to fourthey relied exclusively on us to provide. i see this as a positive. >> what you think are the states? >> on vacation i've been -- on occasion i've been hard. that is not the case. it has to do something, and we absolutely have the capability. i have to be clear about the military objective is that i was being asked to achieve. i have to be clear about how these were contributing to some outcomes that we would all understand and agree upon. what is the outcome? but the dishes stopping the if it is just stopping the violence, that is one outcome. i can build from that outcome. i can build military options andthe other responsibility is to balance the rest to the mission. what would be the cost of doing this? the risk to the forest is a zero sum game. -- to the fo

the humanitarian aid, and reaching out to the neighboring countries of syria -- both ambassadors in brussels and three authorities on the ground. we are working to ensure an effective and coordinated response. me of suspended all types of operation. the european investment bank, with which we work closely, has suspended all technical assistance to syria. we have maintained a that benefits the population, students, human rights defenders, and the opposition. those programs with syrian students and universities will continue. we are supporting efforts to deliver shelter, medical supplies, food, and whatever is needed. we have put together a contribution of 29 million euros in a bit too affected syria and neighboring countries. the support to the neighboring countries is essential. i discussed these issues when i was in turkey over the weekend with the prime minister who also joined the prime minister by video link. the situation on the turkish border is critical. the turkish response has been critical, fast, and professional. i have offered our assistance on a number of occasions. i did so aga

i am alert to that and i'm going to brussels next week to meet with nato and one of the agenda items is operation unified protection. we have got to be candid with each other. i assure you i will be about what we can reasonably provide and what they need to provide in terms of isr, the fusion of intelligence and operations, and investments and to make to close the gaps here to fore they have relied almost exclusively on us to provide. i actually see this as a positive thing. >> what do you think are the greatest risks if the united states intervenes? >> on occasion, i have been portrayed as saying this is too hard, but not do it. that is not the case. if asked to do something, we absolutely have the capability. but as far as my concerns and how they would translate, i have to be clear about the military objectives i was being asked to achieve an i would have to be clear about how those contributed to some outcome that we would all understand and probably agree upon. if the outcome is just stopping the violence, that's one the outcome. just stopping the regime is another. i can build